DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest

Kain Spero wrote:

Soraya Xel wrote:

el OPERATOR wrote:

Probably because region locking automatically blues up an area based not on in-game affilitations (corps and alliances) but on out-of-game affiliations ( global player region). This, in turn, then could create WORSE bluelocks once a group has enough players spread across global regions, since the total available is restricted by region and easier to control. If I have 16 NA players who can fight on the ASIA primetime we should be able to keep whatever we are able to take, districts included.

I think it was Kane who invented this term "region locking". I am not suggesting any sort of "region lock". I am suggesting the timers do not change from where they're originally seeded at, which should be scattered around the map to create a fairly varied play map.

If you have 16 players who can fight on the Asian prime time you should be able to keep whatever you take, assuming you can also defend it in the Asian prime time.

Timezones are based on regions and if timers are locked and unchangeable then yes, you are proposing region locking PC.

Introducing some sensible mechanics associated with timer changes like escalating cost makes way more sense than trying to force timers that are unchangeable for all time.

Aeon Amadi wrote:

Assuming I'm understanding what is being referred to as 'region locking' correctly, It's not a good solution because people sleep, and work, totaling upwards of 75-96 hours a week. Players would like the opportunity to be able to take districts but if the enemy's primary defense is to schedule their timer(s) at times which they know most of the people in that region work/sleep. It pretty much forces you to get foreign entities on the job or lose sleep/miss work to be able to engage them.

Lot of Americans will be quick to tell you that they don't particularly enjoy having to be up at 03:00 AM to try and fight another corporation for a variety of reasons.

CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5480	Posted - 2015.01.20 14:51:00 - [1] - Quote Removing the ability to change timers simply makes sense. I've gotten a lot of feedback over the past few weeks on it, but I haven't gotten a single gameplay-justified reason to keep the ability to move a timer. It seemed to come down to an emotional appeal of "taking away something from players", even though the thing suggested to take away is bad for players, and we can introduce new, better mechanics instead in other ways. The ability to change a districts' timer really only has one purpose: To prevent it from getting attacked. That's not what we want in an environment of healthy, active district churn. And that's one of the problems with many of Kane's ideas. Kane Spero's suggestions are not designed to prevent squatting of districts, as taking away rewards for squatting districts is unsatisfactory. People will squat districts in odd timers for no reward too. Whether they're useful or not, districts should not be able to be hung onto if not being defended, as we want new players and new corps to have opportunities to get involved. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5480	Posted - 2015.01.20 14:54:00 - [2] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: You currently have 12 Alliances and 72 Corporations involved in the system ( www.dustcharts.com ). How does reducing all of their holdings to ash and nullifying what work they have put into PC as dysfunctional as it is seem justifiable in anyway? Effectively a new version of the game mode? Congrats on winning Season 1. Now time to start Season 2. Your rewards are the billions of free ISK you got. (Many competitive games reset standings seasonally, with such a major mechanics change, it makes sense to reset some things.) Kain Spero wrote: Another thing that would dramatically reduce people using timer hiding would be to implement a system where you can only attack a district within X hours of your own timer. If you hide a district then you should also use the utility of those clones in any attacks you plan. This could be worked into the "attack from a list" system so districts outside your attack window don't show up. Clone packs generated by player activity would still be free to attack any timer they wish though. Doesn't prevent squatting. Just prevents using squatted districts. Doesn't address the problem. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5480	Posted - 2015.01.20 14:59:00 - [3] - Quote Ghostt Shadoww wrote: CCP.....why you talking to Kain as if Kain is CPM still. I'm not a Kain hater never have been. He knows that. Just curious why Rattati you giving Kain special attention and he not even a CPM or has a corp to PC with. If Kain was being talked to like a CPM, he would've been talked to on Skype in private. Rattati is merely noting the expectation that Kain would show up, as he has been incredibly vocal on the issue on the forums, on the podcast, and in a public Skype channel. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5482	Posted - 2015.01.20 16:04:00 - [4] - Quote Ghostt Shadoww wrote: It's favortism period....a Dev should never point out a player in a thread. Keep it professional. It can be taken wrong like I pointed out. No need to mention a player name. A Dev needs to give info to the community. Not say Hey Kain, I've done something think you would enjoy come check it out. There lots of talk and heat in the past with Kain , CPM, and Devs. So why add wood to the fire. Keep it professional not personal. Talk to Dust not an individual player. We are the voice. Not one man that doesn't even PC Actually, he was well aware Kain would NOT like this thread. o_o Pokey Dravon wrote: Ghostt Shadoww wrote: You can't wake up and defend. Then that's your problem ... For me its more like, I'm not going to leave my job to do a PC match. If my corp is working and we always get attacked while we're all at work, are we just screwed until the weekend? This. Timers are crucial for ensuring the work you do while you're playing isn't immediately rendered pointless by things that happen during the time you can't play. Trying to hold anything would be impossible without timers. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5482	Posted - 2015.01.20 16:32:00 - [5] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: As a few people have suggested, windows of attack in the 2-4 hour range seem to make a lot more sense than the specific 1 hour timer set-up that we have now. This is a hugely exclusionary system that would greatly reduce the number of corps that could hold a district in PC. Because it multiplies the amount of time your corp has to be able to field full teams to be able to be viable, and forces PC organizers to block out their entire evening to defend a single district. I like Pokey's expanding timer system that doesn't unfairly punish single district holders who are actively using it. But I think it'd be a whole patch in itself to implement, and I'd rather get features like district raiding in first. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5482	Posted - 2015.01.20 17:49:00 - [6] - Quote SoTa PoP wrote: PC is a sandbox - stop trying to violate it. You've done enough damage with the removal of passive ISK without a decent replacement. The notion "it's a sandbox" is irrelevant if it doesn't also offer compelling gameplay. This is not a valuable argument. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5482	Posted - 2015.01.20 18:20:00 - [7] - Quote Pokey, location mattering being partially mitigated by timer distribution is possibly the only justification for allowing timer changes. However, we don't know how location is going to matter yet. And I don't think empires should be so big that corps are controlling whole planets in a system as small as ours. I would think a group large enough and active enough to have such a large empire that fixed timers becomes an issue would be large enough to span multiple time zones anyways. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5483	Posted - 2015.01.20 22:53:00 - [8] - Quote With regards to raiding: I definitely agree that is the area to work on low-warning more-flexible battles, and something I really want to see. Locking down timers for capture battles is a quick change, and allows us to move on into developing features like that with more flexibility. If we get hung up on a very complicated timer system for capture battles with moving timers and windows and crud, I think it'd delay CCP's ability to fix other issues with PC or get more PC content out. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5483	Posted - 2015.01.21 16:14:00 - [9] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: The Godfathers agree that there is no mafia problem I'm kidding, but you know Well we have a ready gang of players who know the game intimately and are well connected on top of that in that channel and it seems ignoring their knowledge about Planetary Conquest, the problems they've had to go through, and discounting their experience doesn't seem to make much sense. They DO think there are problems with PC and no they don't think timers are perfect. Option (E) was the most popular by far, but region locking was universally thought of as a stupid idea. You have a ready gang of players who know the old model intimately and are occasionally unnecessarily attached to it. FTFY. :) CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5495	Posted - 2015.01.21 22:17:00 - [10] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: A lot (not all, by any means, but the majority I have heard from) of the people who do actually do play PC don't think region locking districts is a good solution. Zaria, here's my problem with this: Nobody can tell me why it's not a good solution, other than it's different from what we have now, and people are resistant to change. Arguments like "taking away choice" or "violating the sandbox" are generally invalid, because games are built on limits, and if a function is not assisting gameplay, it needs to die. I've heard ONE good argument against locking down timer changes, and that's the potential for it to interfere with the "location matters" goal, but that's likely not to be an immediate issue anyways. And if we turn changing timers off, we can still turn it back on later, when the mode is developed further. So even if this did become a problem, I'd be inclined to lock it down for now, and iterate on it, and reopen the capability later. Loss aversion is a huge psychological thing. People are very resistant to losing things or options, even if the alternative is actually better. It's a human nature thing. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.

Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5497	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:02:00 - [11] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Probably because region locking automatically blues up an area based not on in-game affilitations (corps and alliances) but on out-of-game affiliations ( global player region). This, in turn, then could create WORSE bluelocks once a group has enough players spread across global regions, since the total available is restricted by region and easier to control. If I have 16 NA players who can fight on the ASIA primetime we should be able to keep whatever we are able to take, districts included. I think it was Kane who invented this term "region locking". I am not suggesting any sort of "region lock". I am suggesting the timers do not change from where they're originally seeded at, which should be scattered around the map to create a fairly varied play map. If you have 16 players who can fight on the Asian prime time you should be able to keep whatever you take, assuming you can also defend it in the Asian prime time. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5509	Posted - 2015.01.22 01:10:00 - [12] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Probably because region locking automatically blues up an area based not on in-game affilitations (corps and alliances) but on out-of-game affiliations ( global player region). This, in turn, then could create WORSE bluelocks once a group has enough players spread across global regions, since the total available is restricted by region and easier to control. If I have 16 NA players who can fight on the ASIA primetime we should be able to keep whatever we are able to take, districts included. I think it was Kane who invented this term "region locking". I am not suggesting any sort of "region lock". I am suggesting the timers do not change from where they're originally seeded at, which should be scattered around the map to create a fairly varied play map. If you have 16 players who can fight on the Asian prime time you should be able to keep whatever you take, assuming you can also defend it in the Asian prime time. Timezones are based on regions and if timers are locked and unchangeable then yes, you are proposing region locking PC. Introducing some sensible mechanics associated with timer changes like escalating cost makes way more sense than trying to force timers that are unchangeable for all time. How does that solve the problem though? Aeon Amadi wrote: Assuming I'm understanding what is being referred to as 'region locking' correctly, It's not a good solution because people sleep, and work, totaling upwards of 75-96 hours a week. Players would like the opportunity to be able to take districts but if the enemy's primary defense is to schedule their timer(s) at times which they know most of the people in that region work/sleep. It pretty much forces you to get foreign entities on the job or lose sleep/miss work to be able to engage them. Lot of Americans will be quick to tell you that they don't particularly enjoy having to be up at 03:00 AM to try and fight another corporation for a variety of reasons. It is in fact that solution which fixes that. If people can't change the timers, they no longer have to get up at 3 AM if they want their district back, because it will still be in the timer they left it. They enemy can't "schedule" the timer at a time when you're asleep. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 5521	Posted - 2015.01.22 05:35:00 - [13] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Just to be clear: Talented, skilled, and dedicated players that cluster together into cohesive organizations will ALWAYS dominate competitive games. You will not ever formulate a ruleset to make PC "More Inclusive", the best will always rise to the top along whatever rails you provide and will squeeze others out, and you will never stop that. So please do not misplace the desire of having meaningful activities for casual or lesser-skilled players into the PVP end-game of Dust. It's really not hard. You need to introduce mechanics that make holding more territory than you need unhealthy. ZDub 303 wrote: To solve this.. it would seem the best option is to lock the timers to a certain specific time and distribute those based on regional activity... but I think this is just a fundamentally poor idea as it gives neither the attacker nor the defender any agency on when the fight can happen. This, in my opinion, goes against the sandbox nature of New Eden and will overall just feel bad. The attacker and defender do have a choice. They're choosing what district to attack. o_o ZDub 303 wrote: Maybe a window in which district timers can be changed within but allow a hardstop on certain times? Say create a -¦ 4 to 5 hour window for defense timers to be changed and a -¦ 1 to 1.5 hour window in which attackers are available to set the actual attack time? Then round the exact selectable times to either 10 or 15 minute increments? You could also include 'resource raid' mechanics into this fairly nicely... giving a wider window for raids and a smaller window for sov battles perhaps. Semi-flexible defense windows are actually another thing I proposed (which everyone promptly forgot about since Kane wants to defend Nyain San's method of acquiring districts). The attack windows I am very iffy about because they decrease the number of corps who can defend a district successfully, since they'll need more PC grade people on since the time they can be hit is wider. If it's maybe only two hours, I could may get behind that. And resource raiding with a wider flexibility and/or less warning is definitely something I want to see. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.